Print 
PDFJustice Clarence Thomas, the longest-serving sitting member of the Supreme Court, declared Friday that the publication of a draft majority opinion on abortion has permanently damaged trust within the nation’s highest court and is a symptom of a broader decline in America’s institutions.
Speaking at a conference in Dallas, TX., he wondered out loud: "I wonder how long we're going to have these institutions."
The consequence of the "broader decline."
Speaker Pelosi, second in line to the presidency of the United States behind Vice President Kamala Harris, is advocating for further decline.
Saturday, it took only 180 minutes after the horrific shooting in Buffalo, NY., killing 10 people, before Democrats were calling for more gun control.
Yesterday afternoon, a shooter wounded multiple people at Geneva Presbyterian Church in Laguna Woods, located in Southern California.
More on that later.
Be informed, not misled.
“I do think that what happened at the court is tremendously bad,” Thomas declared during a discussion at a conference for Black conservatives in Dallas. “I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them and then I wonder when they’re gone or destabilized what we will have as a country and I don’t think the prospects are good if we continue to lose them.”
“When you lose that trust, especially in the institution that I’m in, it changes the institution fundamentally. You begin to look over your shoulder,” Thomas said. “It’s kind of like infidelity that you can explain it, but you can’t undo it.”
Thomas said that before the release of the draft opinion he considered that sort of disclosure unthinkable.
“If someone said that one line of one opinion would be leaked by anyone ... you would say: ‘That’s impossible. No one would ever do that,’” the justice said. “That was verboten. It was beyond anyone’s understanding or at least anyone’s imagination.”
He also noted the fact that the Supreme Court Justices' homes and families are now being targeted by demonstrators because things apparently are not going to go their way on abortion. That would never have happened in the past.
The demonstrations at all six originalist Justices' homes would have never happened in the past.
He's right. First, it's actually against the law, and secondly, we are a nation whose children have been indoctrinated under the guise of "education" to basically hate America.
About the "symptoms of a broader decline."
The Supreme Court is "dangerous" to freedom?
Yes, it is, the Supreme Court of the United States is actually "anti-freedom" and it's Trump's fault.
She says, “Who would have ever suspected that a creature like Donald Trump would become president of the United States, waving a list of judges that he would appoint, therefore, getting the support of the far-right, and appointing those anti-freedom justices to the court?”
She continued telling CNN, “Let’s not take our eye off the ball. The ball is this court, which is dangerous to the freedoms of our country,” further suggesting that the court would also rule against marriage equality (so-called "same-sex marriage") in the future.
So Pelosi's intention is not merely to uphold Roe v Wade, but to destroy the Supreme Court as we have known it.
She told CNN in conclusion, "The fact is, this is a dangerous court to families, to freedom in our country. And that is why people have to mobilize. And my saying is, we don't agonize; we organize."
Well, they are "organizing" and "mobilizing."
And demonstrating in front of the "originalist" Supreme Court Justices' homes.
Republicans and even some Democrats are crying foul. Clarance Thomas calls it "bullying" in an attempt to get the Justices to change their mind on Roe v Wade.
Even the Washington Post admits that the Democrats have been forced into a tough spot because they keep saying the "White House is saying that such protests by its abortion-rights allies are okay as long as they remain peaceful."
Democrat Senate Majority Leader told the Post, "There are protests three, four times a week outside my house. The American way to peacefully protest is okay."
But it isn't "okay" in regards to the Supreme Court Justices--- it's illegal. And the Post admits it. They say "it's probably illegal" to demonstrate at a Justice of the Supreme Court's house, regardless of how "peaceful' it is."
Here's why.
A law created in 1950---"18 U.S. Code 1507-Picketing or parading" says this:
Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Nothing in this section shall interfere with or prevent the exercise by any court of the United States of its power to punish for contempt.
The NYT says, "But the debate underscores the divisions in a country that cannot even agree on how or when to protest its disagreements. And it foreshadows a potentially more confrontational period this summer if the court issues a final opinion that overturns the right to abortion.
Asked about the protests outside justices’ homes last week, Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, said she did not have “an official U.S. government position on where people protest,” adding that President Biden wanted “people’s privacy to be respected.”
It would be more meaningful to hear the President of the United States say he wants the laws of our land" to be respected---Or better yet, "be obeyed."
This is a deeply dividing and polarizing issue. As much so as the issue of slavery was more than 150 years ago.
This is not merely a politically partisan issue.
HBO host and comedian Bill Maher---who is neither Republican nor conservative--- railed against protesters who have gathered in front of the six conservative Supreme Court justices’ homes in recent days.
Reacting to Jen Psake's comments that the White House does not have a position on demonstrators going to the Justices' homes, Maher criticized Psaki for this reply, stating: “But we do. It’s wrong. It’s intimidation. It’s against the law.” Maher continued, “It’s not terribly violent, obviously, but would you want these protesters outside your house?”
Takeaway.
I fear it's only a matter of time until some deranged person becomes violent at one of these "illegal," "peaceful demonstrations" at Supreme Court Justices' homes. Unfortunately, the Left seems to be suggesting that the demonstrations, although illegal, are okay.
In Second Thessalonians 2:7 Paul wrote, "The mystery of iniquity [lawlessness in most translations] doth already work."
Saturday an 18-year-old gunman, according to authorities, killed 10 people in a Buffalo supermarket. It only took 180 minutes after the story broke in the news for Democrat politicians to begin trying to capitalize on the shooting by demanding more gun laws.
Yesterday afternoon at least 6 people were shot---4 critically wounded, 1 dead as of last night in Southern California at the Geneva Presbyterian Church in Laguna Woods.
California has more gun restrictions than any state in the country, yet leftist politicians were calling for more gun legislation in California within hours of the tragedy.
The Psalmist wrote in Psalm 11, "If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?"
I'll be talking more about that on our radio program today. Here's how to join me from anywhere in the world.
Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Engaged. Be Prayerful.